Henry III Fine Rolls: Blog

Posts Tagged ‘William de Munchensy’

Henry III began this week at Westminster. After his long sojourn in the Tower, what a relief to be back at his great palace. Once more he could pray beside the shrine of his patron saint, Edward the Confessor, and survey the magnificent abbey he was rebuilding in his honour. Surprisingly, however, Henry’s stay only lasted a few days. On 14 December he left for Merton priory in Surrey, a religious house where he often stayed. Conceivably, after his long absence, the palace of Westminster was not ready to receive him. He would enjoy the hospitality of the Merton monks before returning to Westminster for Christmas.

As we saw from last week’s blog, on 7 December Henry had proclaimed the ‘form of peace’ agreed with his opponents. But the agreement was far from universal. At Merton on Friday 16 December, Henry issued an appeal to those who had yet to seal the document, urging them to do so. If they could not come in person, they could just send their seals.

The list of the recalcitrants was the same as it had been on 7 December. In the order given it was as follows.

Roger Bigod, earl of Norfolk

John de Warenne, earl of Surrey,

Simon de Montfort, earl of Leiecester

Roger Mortimer

Hugh Despencer

William Bardolph

John de Burgh

Henry de Hastings

John fitzJohn

Robert de Vipont

William de Munchensy

John fitzAlan

Nicholas of Seagrave

Geoffrey de Lucy

How many of these men actually responded to the call to seal the agreement we do not know, but what we do know is that they never acted as a body to oppose it. That for Henry was enough. Inaction amounted to acceptance, acceptance of his recovery of power and the effective abrogation of the Provisions of Oxford. Just to hammer home the point, on 11 December Henry sent envoys to the new pope Urban IV, asking him to renew his predecessor’s absolution from the oath to obey the Provisions, Provisions which had been issued ‘manifestly to the depression and diminution of royal power’.

Only one man stood out against this feeble acquiescence: Simon de Montfort. According to the friendly and well informed annals of Dunstable priory, having heard that his erstwhile allies had capitulated, ‘he left England, saying that he preferred to die without land than be a perjurer and depart from the truth’. This was the defining moment in Simon’s career, the moment when he showed he was not as other men. Unlike everyone else, he would not abandon the Provisions. He would only return to England if they were resurrected. When he did return in 1263 it was to lead a movement which aimed to do just that.

The fine rolls continue to reflect the uncertainty of this period. Things were far from back to normal. The fine rolls, like the other rolls of the chancery, continue to record business in a jumbled chronological order. The dearth of those seeking the writs to pursue the common law legal actions continued. Only four such writs were purchased between dated entries on 12 and 23 December. In one writ on the fine rolls, issued on 12 December, Henry rewarded a man who, morally and materially, had been crucial to his recovery of power. This was Philip Basset. Basset was a wealthy and respected magnate. In the subsequent civil war he was as defiant in defeat as he was magnanimous in victory. He refused to surrender at the battle of Lewes, and was captured covered in wounds. After Evesham, he did all he could to alleviate the lot of the disinherited. It was immensely important for Henry’s cause in 1261, that he had a man of this calibre on his side, and indeed could appoint him as justiciar, in effect the chief minister of his regime. What made Basset’s stance all the more significant, was that years before, in 1233 he and his older brother, Gilbert Basset, had joined Richard Marshal, earl of Pembroke’s rebellion against the crown. Philip then was no pliant, unthinking loyalist. Henry’s concession on 12 December itself reached back to the events of 1233, since when Philip had succeeded Gilbert as lord of the Basset estates. Henry now pardoned Philip the £9 4s 4d owed for the farm of High Wycombe (a chief Basset manor held from the crown) for the first part of the financial year 1232-3. The concession appears 6th from the bottom on the fine roll. The reason was that Gilbert had been unable to receive the money ‘because the king had taken [High Wycombe] into his hand at the aforesaid time by reason of the war waged between the king and Richard earl Marshal’. So, for the king. Philip’s loyalty in 1261 wiped away the last stain disloyalty of 1233. Philip would not have looked at it like that. Rebellion in 1233 had been justified. In 1261 it was not.

Would Henry get to his palace and abbey at Westminster for a happy and peaceful Christmas? Read subsequent blogs to find out.